The Most Useful Information
If someone gave you information identical to information you already have, how much would you value the information given? Well, you might put a small value on it because it confirms your knowledge and maybe helps you feel more secure. But it is unlikely you would pay much for it.
It follows that the most valuable information could be the most different from the information you already have. But there is a problem: New information could be different and useless or different and useful. We apply our minds to decide.
Please do not summarily reject information in this report because it is very different from what you now know. Even if initially you object strongly to new information, you may find that your objections are satisfactorily answered later...
Sometimes when two people communicate it is as if suddenly a brick wall jumps up between them. This usually happens when one person reacts with resistance to something the other says or does. And sometimes the other person then reacts with resistance to the resistance...
Such invisible brick walls become barriers to further communication. Probably the most prevalent way such brick walls are brought about is when one person says or does something that makes the other wrong - or when the other person feels or perceives being made wrong...
Another way such brick walls come about is when a communication is perceived as threatening. Consider the possibility that the information that would be most valuable to you might be information most different from some of the information you now hold. If this is so, then the information potentially most valuable to you could also seem the most threatening...
Some of us build invisible brick walls around us to "protect" and "isolate" us from people of different color, culture, class, race, age, sex, political or religious persuasion, etc...
We have the ability not only to control our own invisible brick walls, but also to influence the brick walls of others to a considerable extent. This is an awesome power wielded by the most charismatic...
By becoming more aware of our own brick walls and those of others, we gain control over invisible brick walls - and increase our power to communicate.
Sometimes there are people - like the manufacturers of AZT - who profit from bad information. Such people tend to throw up every brick wall they can to prevent the communication of the useful information that exposes their bad information. They don't want people like Celia Farber to communicate information that would harm them.
During this report it will become clear that there is a huge AIDS industry that depends on bad information for its existence and its billions in income.
It is probably axiomatic that anyone who uses underhand or violent methods (including political or religious censorship) to prevent the communication of information, is dependent on the perpetuation of bad information.
The most useful information is usually the most difficult to communicate!
Overcoming the Semmelweis-Reflex.
Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis was a Hungarian physician who discovered in the 1840s that puerperal or childbed fever could be virtually abolished if doctors washed their hands in a chlorine solution. This is a superb example of a new inside angle (described below). The Semmelweis story is told in Betrayers of the Truth: Fraud and Deceit in the Halls of Science By William Broad & Nicholas Wade. In the 1840s puerperal fever typically caused a 10-30% mortality rate in maternity hospitals throughout Europe. Semmelweis reduced the mortality rate in the division of the obstetric clinic where he worked in the General Hospital of Vienna from 18 percent to 1 percent. But he failed to convince his colleagues and superiors. Instead of listening to him, and disinfecting their hands, they hounded, persecuted, and fired him - for daring to suggest that they wash their hands properly. In the autumn of 1860, after the dismissal of Semmelweis, in the same ward where he had demonstrated how to virtually eradicate childbed fever, 35 out of 101 patients died.
In a book published in 1861 Semmelweis presented his statistics and findings. He sent copies to medical societies and to leading obstetricians in Germany, France, and England. Despite his copious and undisputed statistics he was completely ignored.
Thirty years after Semmelweis's discovery, Lister and Pasteur succeeded in convincing doctors that they should disinfect their hands.
The Semmelweis-reflex is the automatic rejection of the obvious, without thought, inspection, or experiment. It was so named by author Robert Anton Wilson. The results that Semmelweis produced made it obvious that his possible discovery needed to be inspected, experimented with, and thought about.
You may think that in the enlightened age of 1993 humans no longer suffer from the Semmelweis-reflex. This could be a mistake. During the past seven years Dr. Duesberg has repeatedly drawn attention to the fact that the HIV-AIDS hypothesis produces no health benefits. He has proposed a plausible alternative hypothesis - that seems obvious to his supporters. He has written articles and scientific papers. He has received some media attention. Yet the "establishment" automatically rejects what he says, without thought, inspection, or experiment.
"Among the innumerable mortifications
which waylay human arrogance
on every side may well be
reckoned our ignorance
of the most common objects
and effects, a defect of which we
become more sensible by every
attempt to supply it.
Vulgar and inacpive minds
confound familiarity with knowledge
and conceive themselves informed
of the whole nature of things
when they are shown their form
or told their use; but the speculatist,
who is not content with superficial views,
harasses himself with fruitless curiosity,
and still, as he inquires more,
perceives only that he knows less."
- Samuel Johnson
"Sit down before fact like a little child, and be prepared
to give up every preconceived notion, follow humbly wherever and to whatever
abyss Nature leads, or you shall learn nothing."
- T.H. Huxley
"Wipe your glasses with what you know."
- James Joyce
"Write what you "know" on a roll of toilet paper,
wipe your backside with it, and flush it down the toilet."
- Frederick Mann
The Inside-Angle Orientation.
This is probably one of the most powerful success principles ever formulated. Here are its elements:
Dr. Duesberg is the perfect example as someone who has found important inside angles relating to AIDS. In order to adopt the inside-angle orientation there are certain obstacles you may have to overcome:
Every single human being, anywhere on Earth, needs better inside angles. No matter where you live or what you do, there are inside angles you can apply to improve your wealth, your health, your happiness, your work, your business, your relationships, your sex-life... you name it. Everybody needs better inside angles.
The scientific and technological history of Earth is the history of inside angles that were discovered, developed, communicated, and applied. E=MC2 is an example of an inside angle. The notion that the earth is round was an inside angle at the time when most people believed it was flat.
Any subject, activity, or business you care to think of could be improved by new inside angles. Everybody needs better inside angles. The discovery, communication, and application of inside angles have increased human well-being phenomenally - and will continue to do so. Inside angles have repeatedly transformed the world - and will continue to do so.
The subject of how to find new inside angles is covered in Report #TL03: How to Improve Your Information.
How do we successfully communicate inside angles and get them applied? If we find inside angles the world could benefit from, how do we share them so everyone benefits? These are further inside angles covered extensively in the Build Freedom reports.
The Bicameral Mind Hypothesis
An understanding of the evolution of human consciousness will help us understand why so many AIDS researchers and physicians cling to the HIV-AIDS hypothesis despite the fact that it produces no health benefits. Consider the bicameral model of the mind below.
Bicameral stage 1:
|Automatic visions and voices tell you what to do. |
You automatically obey the "voices of authority."
You think and speak like a slave.
Obedience is paramount.
Bicameral stage 2:
|Automatic feelings and thoughts tell you what to do. |
You behave like:
(a) A true believer (sometimes a fanatic fighter for a "great cause"); or
(b) A helpless wimp (languishing in apathy, sometimes complaining); or
(c) A self-righteous preacher (making self "right" and others "wrong"); or
(d) A macho rebel (compulsively fighting "the system," "the IRS," "the government").
Being "right" is paramount.
|You have largely mastered your feelings and emotions.
You have the ability to critically examine every concept, every thought, every action.
You strive to increase your competence in every aspect of your life.
You carefully observe the results you produce, using that as feedback to improve your concepts, thoughts, communications, and actions.
You live free and creatively - you are a Freeperson.
Producing results is paramount.
According to Dr. Julian Jaynes (The Origin of Consciousness in the
Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind), up to about 3,000 years ago humans
were not conscious as we know consciousness today. Their minds worked like
Situations triggered mental voices and/or visions that were automatically generated in the right brain, from where they were communicated via the anterior commissure to the left brain, where the visions were "seen" and the voices "heard." The mental voices and visions "told" people what to do. Today, some people still manifest this form of mentation - sometimes called schizophrenia. I call this stage in the evolution of consciousness, bicameral stage one - the pre-conscious human. In this stage obedience is paramount.
Many people are aware of an automatic, apparently uncontrollable "stream of thoughts" going on in their heads. Sometimes a situation will trigger an automatic thought like "she doesn't love me," followed by automatic feelings and emotions - apparently not under control. When I watch and listen to a TV talk show like "Good Morning America" or "Morton Downey, Jr.," it seems to me that most of the participants, including the host and the specially invited speakers, merely regurgitate their automatic thoughts - their emphasis being on trying to prove self "right" and others "wrong." I call this bicameral stage two - the proto-conscious human. In this stage being "right" is paramount.
A rapidly growing number of people have started questioning and critically examining concepts, beliefs, and behaviors held sacred by their elders and most of their contemporaries. These people want to produce better results in their lives: their health, their relationships, their careers. In any area where they think their results are below expectations they seek to improve their knowledge, their skills, their competence. They also realize that some of their difficulties stem from destructive thoughts and behavior patterns acquired or developed during childhood. Their emphasis is on producing results. I call this the conscious stage.
Many humans are in transition from bicameral stage 2 to the conscious stage. Some are still in transition from bicameral stage 1 to bicameral stage 2. Some show signs of all three stages.
Believing in total obedience to something outside yourself (an external "authority") is typical of bicameral stage 1. If you're a bicameral stage 2 proto-conscious human, you will probably be a true believer, a somewhat helpless apathetic, or a compulsive rebel. These three types compare to three of the life-orientations identified by Dr. Eric Byrne in Transactional Analysis: "I'm not OK - you're OK" (true believer); "I'm not OK - you're not OK" (helpless apathetic); and "I'm OK - you're not OK" (compulsive rebel). As you evolve into the conscious stage you move towards "I'm OK - you're OK."
Are our 40,000 AIDS researchers and millions of health professionals around the world slavishly obedient to the HIV-AIDS hypothesis because it has been decreed by "authority?" Or are they true believers who dare not think differently, who must prove the hypothesis right at all cost? Who has the courage to ask, "In nine years this hypothesis has produced no results, maybe we should question it?" What would a conscious individual do?
Suppose there are two competing hypotheses to explain the cause of the "AIDS-defined diseases." The first hypothesis says that the diseases are caused by the individual's behavior: drugs, promiscuiry, diet, whatever. The second hypothesis says that the diseases are caused by something from outside the individual, a kind of "external authority" - for example, an invading virus. Given the bicameral model of the mind, which hypothesis would most people choose?
Human Consciousness is in its Infancy
Philosopher and psychologist Nietzsche indicated that human consciousness is in its infancy. Suppose the universe is four billion years old, humans have existed for about 200,000 to 300,000 years, and have been conscious for maybe 5,000 years. In evolutionary terms, our consciousness is in its infancy. We are at the level of a baby just beginning to learn to crawl.
Consider that all the problems in the world - unhappiness, crime, drug abuse, suicide, rape, terrorism, government, war, pollution, poverty, famine, child abuse, depression, unemployment, inflation, homelessness, unhealth, AIDS, etc. - are a consequence of the fact that human thinking skills are still at a very primitive infancy level.
What if we are like primitive, backward, barbaric infants who are yet to learn to crawl - but we deceive ourselves into believing that we are the finest olympic athletes?
Let us learn to crawl, walk, run, and jump!
Contents - Next Section
Disclaimer - Copyright - Contact
Online: buildfreedom.org - terrorcrat.com - mind-trek.com